From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.38.4: xfs speed problem?
Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 12:18:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DC6D067.1080208@hardwarefreak.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110508003321.GI26837@dastard>
On 5/7/2011 7:33 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 12:09:46PM -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Using 2.6.38.4 on two hosts:
>>
>> Host 1:
>> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1> /dev/null
>> 80.92user 417.93system 2:19:07elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105520maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (0major+73373minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>>
>> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sda1
>> actual 40203982, ideal 40088075, fragmentation factor 0.29%
>>
>> meta-data=/dev/sda1 isize=256 agcount=44, agsize=268435455 blks
>> = sectsz=512 attr=2
>> data = bsize=4096 blocks=11718704640, imaxpct=5
>> = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks
>> naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0
>> log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=521728, version=2
>> = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
>> realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
>>
>> --
>>
>> Host 2:
>> $ /usr/bin/time find geocities.data 1>/dev/null
>> 54.60user 337.20system 48:42.71elapsed 13%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 105632maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (1major+72981minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>>
>> # xfs_db -c frag -f /dev/sdb1
>> actual 37998306, ideal 37939331, fragmentation factor 0.16%
>>
>> meta-data=/dev/sdb1 isize=256 agcount=10, agsize=268435455 blks
>> = sectsz=512 attr=2
>> data = bsize=4096 blocks=2441379328, imaxpct=5
>> = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks
>> naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0
>> log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=521728, version=2
>> = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
>> realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
How much would it help, if any, with this specific 'test', or with
overall XFS performance, if Justin were to...
>> Host 1: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 18+1 hot spare)
remake the fs on the above device with 'sw=16' or remount with
appropriate sunit and swidth values?
>> Host 2: RAID-6 (7200 RPM Drives, 12)
remake the fs on the above device with 'sw=10' or remount with
appropriate sunit and swidth values?
--
Stan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-08 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-07 16:09 2.6.38.4: xfs speed problem? Justin Piszcz
2011-05-08 0:33 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-08 17:18 ` Stan Hoeppner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DC6D067.1080208@hardwarefreak.com \
--to=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox